RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Social cohesion refers to an individual's sense of belonging to their community and correlates with health outcomes. Rural communities tend to have higher social cohesion than urban communities. Social cohesion is relatively understudied as a factor impacting COVID-19 prevention behaviors. This study explores the associations between social cohesion, rurality, and COVID-19 prevention behaviors. METHODS: Participants completed a questionnaire assessing rurality; social cohesion (subscales of (1) attraction to neighborhood, (2) acts of neighboring, and (3) sense of community); COVID-19 behaviors; and demographics. Chi-square tests were used to characterize participant demographics and COVID-19 behaviors. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyze the relationship between COVID-19 outcomes and rurality, social cohesion, and demographics. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 2,926) were non-Hispanic White (78.2%) and married (60.4%); 36.9% were rural. Rural participants were less likely than urban participants to practice social distancing (78.7% vs 90.6%, P<.001) or stay home when sick (87.7% vs 93.5%, P<.001). Social distancing was more common among participants with higher "attraction to neighborhood" scores (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.26-3.47) but was less common among participants with higher "acts of neighboring" scores (aOR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.40-0.88). Staying home when sick was also more common among participants with higher scores on "attraction to neighborhood" (aOR = 2.12; 95% CI = 1.15-3.91), and less common among participants with higher scores on "acts of neighboring" (aOR = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.33-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to maximize COVID-19 behavioral prevention, particularly among rural communities, should emphasize the importance of protecting the health of one's neighbors and how to support one's neighbors without face-to-face interactions.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cohesión Social , Humanos , Población Rural , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Características de la Residencia , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Despite advancement in vaccines and treatments for COVID-19 over the past 2 years, many concerns remain about reinfection and waning immunity against COVID-19 and its variants, especially among people with substance use disorder (SUD). The study assessed the risk of COVID-19 reinfection and severe illness among adults with SUD and their vaccination status to inform management in this vulnerable population as the pandemic continues. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Nationwide electronic health records (TriNetX database) in the USA among adults with COVID-19 infection from January 2020 to June 2022. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (age ≥18 years) who were infected by COVID-19, excluding those who had cancer or lived in nursing homes or palliative care facilities. OUTCOME MEASURES: COVID-19 reinfection was defined as a new diagnosis after 45 days of the initial infection. Logistic regression was applied to assess the OR of COVID-19 reinfection and severe outcomes within 30 day of reinfection for adults with alcohol (AUD), opioid (OUD), cocaine (CUD), stimulant (STUD), cannabis (CAUD) and other use disorders, controlled for demographic and comorbid conditions. RESULTS: The SUD cohort was 13%-29% more likely to be reinfected by COVID-19 and had significantly higher 30-day mortality. Adults with AUD, STUD and OUD were at greater risks (adjusted ORs, AORs=1.69-1.86) of emergency department, hospital and intensive care admissions after 30 days of reinfection. Individuals with SUD and multiple vaccines doses were associated with decreased risks of worse COVID-19 outcomes. Lower COVID-19 reinfection rates (AORs=0.67-0.84) were only found among individuals with AUD, CUD or CAUD who had COVID-19 vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with SUD had greater risks of COVID-19 reinfection and poor outcomes, especially those with OUD, STUD and AUD. Multiple vaccinations are recommended to reduce severe illness after COVID-19 reinfection in the SUD population.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , Estudios Retrospectivos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Reinfección , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
The past decades have seen growing interest and application of interventions targeting the change of multiple behaviors at once. We advance this work by using the diffusion of innovations theory (DOI) to consider constellations of behaviors as innovation packages: multiple innovations that are logically related, interdependent in their use or effects, and often promoted as a set (Rogers, 2003). In addition, we embraced DOI's focus on behavioral decisions as a continual process that can include adoption and discontinuance over time, especially as new innovations (e.g., COVID-19 vaccine) appear. To that end, we conducted a latent transition analysis of COVID-19 mitigation behaviors (N = 697; 97% received a COVID-19 vaccine) across three time points in the pandemic: initial outbreak; a secondary, record-breaking rise in cases; and after the CDC recommended that fully vaccinated adults could discontinue wearing masks. This analysis allowed us to identify latent classes based on shared behavioral patterns and transitions between classes over time. The results showed evidence of three possible packages: (a) a package of traditional, symptom-management behaviors (covering coughs and sneezes, staying home if ill, and seeking medical care), (b) a package of just-novel COVID-19 behaviors (wearing masks, keeping six feet apart, and avoiding mass gatherings), and (c) a package of all COVID-19 mitigation behaviors. Movement between classes exemplified adoption and discontinuance of different packages, as well as widespread discontinuance with the replacement innovation: COVID-19 vaccines. Additional analyses showed that increases in hope were associated with sustained and delayed adoption; decreases in social approval were associated with discontinuance. Future directions in theorizing around innovation packages are discussed.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess associations between morphine-equivalent daily dose (MEDD) of opioids, clinician and patient characteristics, and prescriber adherence to guidelines for long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) and to elucidate potential relationships associated with increased-risk opioid prescribing. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Academic health system's 33 primary care clinics. PATIENTS: Adults (≥18 years old) prescribed LTOT (10 + outpatient prescriptions in the past year) for CNCP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Electronic health record data on prescribed opioids (for MEDD), clinician/patient characteristics, and adherence rates to LTOT guideline-concordant recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 2,738 patients were eligible, 61.6 percent Lower, 15.7 percent Moderate, and 22.7 percent Higher Risk MEDD (<50, 50-89, and ≥90 mg/day, respectively). Higher MEDD correlated (p < 0.001) with Medicare insurance, current cigarette smoking, higher pain intensity and interference scores, and the presence of opioid use disorder diagnoses. Male clinicians more frequently prescribed (p < 0.001) and male patients were more likely to be prescribed (p < 0.001) higher MEDD compared to their female counterparts. Higher Risk MEDD was associated with higher coprescribed benzodiazepines (p = 0.015), lower depression screening (p = 0.048), urine drug testing (p = 0.003), comparable active treatment agreement (p = 0.189), opioid misuse risk screening (p = 0.619), and prescription drug monitoring checks (p = 0.203). CONCLUSIONS: This study documented that higher MEDD was associated with risks of worse health outcomes without improved adherence to opioid prescribing guideline recommendations. Enhanced clinician awareness of factors associated with MEDD has the potential to mitigate LTOT risks and improve overall patient care.
Asunto(s)
Dolor Crónico , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Adolescente , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios Transversales , Dolor Crónico/diagnóstico , Dolor Crónico/tratamiento farmacológico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Medicare , Morfina , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/diagnóstico , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/epidemiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/prevención & controlRESUMEN
ABSTRACT: COVID-19 has led to marked increases in healthcare worker distress. Studies of these phenomena are often limited to a particular element of distress or a specific subset of healthcare workers. We administered the Moral Injury Symptom Scale for Healthcare Professionals, Copenhagen Burnout Inventory, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 via online survey to 17,000 employees of a large academic medical center between December 2021 and February 2022. A total of 1945 participants completed the survey. Across all roles, the prevalence of moral injury, burnout, depression, and anxiety were 40.9%, 35.3%-60.6%, 25.4%, and 24.8%, respectively. Furthermore, 8.1% had been bothered by thoughts that they would be better off dead or of hurting themselves for "several days" or more frequently. Healthcare workers across all roles and practice settings are experiencing unsustainable levels of distress, with 1 in 12 regularly experiencing thoughts of self-harm.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático , Humanos , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Depresión/epidemiología , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiología , Trastornos de Ansiedad/epidemiología , Ansiedad/epidemiología , Agotamiento Psicológico , Personal de SaludRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Misapplication of the 2016 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) opioid prescribing guidelines has led to overem-phasis of morphineequivalent daily dose (MEDD) as a "metric of success" in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP), resulting in unintentional harms to patients. This article reviews CNCP-related guidelines and patient preferences in order to identify pragmatic, patient-centered metrics to assess treatment response and safety in opioid-treated CNCP. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical (CDC), research (Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials), and implementability-related guidelines (GuideLine Implementability Appraisal), along with relevant patient-identified treatment goals. From these, we summarize a guideline-concordant, patient-centered, implementable set of measures to aid the clinical management of opioid-treated CNCP. RESULTS: We identify metrics across three domains of care: (1) treatment response metrics, which align with the CNCP care goals (pain intensity, pain interference including function and quality of life, and global impression of change); (2) risk assessment ("safety") metrics, eg, MEDD, benzodiazepine-opioid or naloxone-opioid coprescribing, and severity of mental health disorders, which evaluate the risk-benefit profile of opioid therapy; and (3) adherence ("process") metrics, which assess clinician/patient adherence to the guideline-recommended opioid therapy monitoring practices, eg, the presence of completed treatment agreement or urine toxicology testing. All metrics should be informed by implementability principles, eg, be decidable, executable, and measurable. CONCLUSIONS: This article summarizes guideline-concordant, patient-centered, implementable metrics for assessing treatment response, safety, and adherence in opioid-treated CNCP. Regardless of which specific treatment guidelines are applied, this approach could help conceptualize and standardize the collection and reporting of CNCP-relevant metrics, compare them across health systems, and optimize care and treatment outcomes in opioid-treated CNCP.
RESUMEN
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adults with opioid-treated chronic low back pain (CLBP), an understudied area. Participants in a "parent" clinical trial of non-pharmacologic treatments for CLBP were invited to complete a one-time survey on the perceived pandemic impact across several CLBP- and opioid therapy-related domains. Participant clinical and other characteristics were derived from the parent study's data. Descriptive statistics and latent class analysis analyzed quantitative data; qualitative thematic analysis was applied to qualitative data. The survey was completed by 480 respondents from June 2020 to August 2021. The majority reported a negative pandemic impact on their life (84.8%), with worsened enjoyment of life (74.6%), mental health (74.4%), pain (53.8%), pain-coping skills (49.7%), and finances (45.3%). One-fifth (19.4%) of respondents noted increased use of prescribed opioids; at the same time, decreased access to medication and overall healthcare was reported by 11.3% and 61.6% of respondents, respectively. Latent class analysis of the COVID-19 survey responses revealed 2 patterns of pandemic-related impact; those with worse pandemic-associated harms (nâ =â 106) had an overall worse health profile compared to those with a lesser pandemic impact. The pandemic substantially affected all domains of relevant health-related outcomes as well as healthcare access, general wellbeing, and financial stability among adults with opioid-treated CLBP. A more nuanced evaluation revealed a heterogeneity of experiences, underscoring the need for both increased overall support for this population and for an individualized approach to mitigate harms induced by pandemic or similar crises.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Dolor Crónico , Dolor de la Región Lumbar , Humanos , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Estudios Transversales , Pandemias , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/terapia , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Dolor Crónico/terapiaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Chronic pain is a significant health concern that adversely affects all aspects of life, including emotional well-being. Opioids are prescribed for the management of refractory, severe chronic pain, although they have been associated with adverse effects, including addiction and overdose. The aim of this study was to examine factors that predict thoughts of self-harm among adults with chronic pain who are prescribed opioids. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven hundred sixty-five (N=765) persons with opioid-treated chronic lower back pain completed the Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) and other validated questionnaires as part of a larger study. Response to 1 question from the COMM ("How often have you seriously thought about hurting yourself?") was used to assess suicide risk on a 5-point scale (0=never; 4=very often). RESULTS: Participants were categorized into 3 groups according to their responses to the self-harm question: never (N=628; 82.1%), seldom or sometimes (N=74; 9.7%), and often or very often (N=63; 8.2%). Multivariate adjusted odds ratio (aOR) analyses indicated that reports of alcohol or drug overuse within the past month (aOR=1.41,[95% CI 1.11-1.78]), posttraumatic stress (PTSD; aOR=1.24,[1.07 to 1.44]), pain catastrophizing (aOR=1.03,[1.01 to 1.05]), not loving oneself (aOR=0.99,[.98-1.00]) and poor perceived mental health (aOR=0.94,[.92 to 97]) were most associated with thoughts of self-harm. Importantly, the ideation frequency of self-harm was highest among individuals treated with higher daily doses of opioids. DISCUSSION: These results support the need for continued monitoring of adults treated with opioids for chronic pain, particularly among those on high-dose opioids who present with increased negative affect and concerns of substance misuse.
Asunto(s)
Dolor Crónico , Dolor de la Región Lumbar , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Conducta Autodestructiva , Adulto , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Dolor Crónico/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor Crónico/epidemiología , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/epidemiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/epidemiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/tratamiento farmacológico , Conducta Autodestructiva/epidemiología , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Inaccurate perceptions of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) risk may decrease compliance with public health mitigation practices, in turn increasing disease burden. The extent to which public perceptions of COVID-19 risk are inaccurate is not well studied. This study investigates the relationship between preferred information sources and inaccurate COVID-19 risk perception. A cross-sectional online survey of adults in the United States using online snowball techniques was administered between April 9, 2020 and July 12, 2020. Raking techniques were used to generate a representative U.S. sample from 10,650 respondents. Respondents who did not provide an answer to key questions were excluded. The remaining sample included 1,785 health care workers (HCW) and 4,843 non-HCW. Subjective risk was measured as the product of perceived likelihood of COVID-19 infection and perceived harm from infection. Objective risk was measured as a function of the presence of known COVID-19 risk factors. Discrepancies between subjective and objective risk were compared between respondents with different preferred information sources. Chi Square contingency tables and pair-wise correlation were used to evaluate differences to 95% confidence. For HCW and non-HCW, the greatest overestimation of personal COVID-19 risk assessment (p < .05 for all differences) were found in those whose preferred source of information was social media (HCW: 62.1%; non-HCW: 64.5%), followed by internet news sources (HCW: 59.6%, non-HCW%: 59.1%), government websites (HCW: 54%, non-HCW = 51.8%), other sources (HCW: 50.7%, non-HCW = 51.4%), and television news (HCW: 46.1%, non-HCW: 47.6%). Preferred information sources correlate with inaccuracies in personal COVID-19 risk assessment. Public health information campaigns should consider targeting groups whose preferred information sources correlate to higher inaccuracies in COVID-19 risk perceptions. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2023;7(2):e105-e110.].
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Fuentes de Información , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Costo de Enfermedad , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) are commonly prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for analgesia, placing this population at increased risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder. Acceptance of aversive experiences (e.g., chronic pain) and awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors (i.e., automaticity) are two facets of dispositional mindfulness that may serve as protective mechanisms against opioid misuse risk. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to examine the differential contributions of these constructs to opioid misuse risk among adults with CLBP receiving LTOT. METHODS: Data were obtained from a sample of 770 adults with opioid-treated CLBP. Bivariate correlations and hierarchical linear regression analyses were used to determine whether chronic pain acceptance and awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors explained a statistically significant portion of variance in opioid misuse risk after accounting for the effects of other relevant confounders. RESULTS: Hierarchical regression results revealed that chronic pain acceptance and awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors contributed a significant portion in the variance of opioid misuse risk. Awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors was negatively associated with opioid misuse risk, such that individuals with lower levels of awareness of automaticity were at higher risk of opioid misuse. By contrast, pain acceptance was not associated with opioid misuse. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that awareness of automaticity may buffer against opioid misuse risk. Interventions designed to strengthen awareness of automaticity (e.g., mindfulness-based interventions) might be especially efficacious among this population.
Asunto(s)
Dolor Crónico , Dolor de la Región Lumbar , Atención Plena , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Adulto , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Dolor Crónico/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/tratamiento farmacológico , Afecto , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Background and Objectives: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, interviews during the 2021 US residency match were conducted virtually, a practice again recommended and repeated by many programs in 2022. The impact of virtual interviews on recruitment and match outcomes has recently been of interest, with results showing the virtual format to be mostly well received by applicants due to cost, travel, and scheduling benefits. Few studies have looked at pre/posttransition comparisons of applicant geographic and demographic data. We compared objective match outcomes between in-person and virtual interviews across three residency programs. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of National Residency Matching Program data between 2015-2022 across three family medicine residency programs. Primary outcomes were fill rate, average rank position, distance from program, and percentage of underrepresented in medicine demographic status for matched applicants. We compared aggregate in-person data (2015-2019) to aggregate virtual data (2020-2022) for each program using χ2, Fisher Exact test, or 2-tailed t tests to 95% confidence. Results: Saint Joseph Hospital in Reading, Pennsylvania, a 3-year community-based university affiliated program, had significantly more unfilled positions during virtual recruitment (P=.0058). Mount Nittany Medical Center in State College, Pennsylvania, a 3-year community based university-affiliated program, had a significant difference in distance of matched residents' current address (P=.048). Virtual interviews were not associated with significant differences in average position on rank list, average distance from permanent address zip code, or percentage of underrepresented in medicine (URiM) demographic status for matched applicants. Conclusions: The impact of virtual interviewing on unfilled positions and geographic data is likely site specific and generally small, as some programs had significant structural changes. Further research is needed to confirm the generalizability of these results and explore future comparisons of demographic and geographic characteristics of matched applicants pre/posttransition to the virtual format.
RESUMEN
We derive a simple asymptotic approximation for the long-run case fatality rate of COVID-19 (alpha and delta variants) and show that these estimations are highly correlated to the interaction between US State median age and projected US unemployment rate (Adj. r2 = 60%). We contrast this to the high level of correlation between point (instantaneous) estimates of per state case fatality rates and the interaction of median age, population density and current unemployment rates (Adj. r2 = 50.2%). To determine whether this is caused by a "race effect," we then analyze unemployment, race, median age and population density across US states and show that adding the interaction of African American population and unemployment explains 53.5% of the variance in COVID case fatality rates for the alpha and delta variants when considering instantaneous case fatality rate. Interestingly, when the asymptotic case fatality rate is used, the dependence on the African American population disappears, which is consistent with the fact that in the long-run COVID does not discriminate on race, but may discriminate on access to medical care which is highly correlated to employment in the US. The results provide further evidence of the impact inequality can have on case fatality rates in COVID-19 and the impact complex social, health and economic factors can have on patient survival.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemias , EmpleoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of literature documenting negative mental health impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to identify risk and protective factors associated with mental health and well-being among pregnant and postpartum women during the pandemic. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, anonymous online survey study distributed to pregnant and postpartum (within 6 months) women identified through electronic health records from two large healthcare systems in the Northeastern and Midwestern United States. Survey questions explored perinatal and postpartum experiences related to the pandemic, including social support, coping, and health care needs and access. Latent class analysis was performed to identify classes among 13 distinct health, social, and behavioral variables. Outcomes of depression, anxiety, and stress were examined using propensity-weighted regression modeling. RESULTS: Fit indices demonstrated a three-class solution as the best fitting model. Respondents (N = 616) from both regions comprised three classes, which significantly differed on sleep- and exercise-related health, social behaviors, and mental health: Higher Psychological Distress (31.8%), Moderate Psychological Distress (49.8%), and Lower Psychological Distress (18.4%). The largest discriminatory issue was support from one's social network. Significant differences in depression, anxiety, and stress severity scores were observed across these three classes. Reported need for mental health services was greater than reported access. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health outcomes were largely predicted by the lack or presence of social support, which can inform public health decisions and measures to buffer the psychological impact of ongoing waves of the COVID-19 pandemic on pregnant and postpartum women. Targeted early intervention among those in higher distress categories may help improve maternal and child health.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Distrés Psicológico , Embarazo , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Pandemias , Análisis de Clases Latentes , Estudios Transversales , Estrés Psicológico/epidemiología , Periodo Posparto/psicología , Depresión/epidemiología , Depresión/psicología , Ansiedad/epidemiología , Ansiedad/psicología , Mujeres Embarazadas/psicologíaRESUMEN
By fall 2020, students returning to U.S. university campuses were mandated to engage in COVID-19 mitigation behaviors, including masking, which was a relatively novel prevention behavior in the U.S. Masking became a target of university mandates and campaigns, and it became politicized. Critical questions are whether the influences of injunctive norms and response efficacy on one behavior (i.e. masking) spill over to other mitigation behaviors (e.g. hand-washing), and how patterns of mitigation behaviors are associated with clinical outcomes. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of college students who returned to campus (N = 837) to explore these questions, and conducted COVID-19 antibody testing on a subset of participants to identify correlations between behaviors and disease burden. The results showed that college students were more likely to intend to wear face masks as they experienced more positive injunctive norms, liberal political views, stronger response efficacy for masks, and less pessimism. Latent class analysis revealed four mitigation classes: Adherents who intended to wear face masks and engage in the other COVID-19 mitigation behaviors; Hygiene Stewards and Masked Symptom Managers who intended to wear masks but only some other behaviors, and Refusers who intended to engage in no mitigation behaviors. Importantly, the Hygiene Stewards and Refusers had the highest likelihood of positive antibodies; these two classes differed in their masking intentions, but shared very low likelihoods of physical distancing from others and avoiding crowds or mass gatherings. The implications for theories of normative influences on novel behaviors, spillover effects, and future messaging are discussed.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios Transversales , Prueba de COVID-19 , Intención , EstudiantesRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Scholarly activity among family medicine physicians is an important element of military medical readiness, both in terms of required scholarship during training and ongoing scholarship to address ongoing and emergent operational medical threats. Most literature on barriers to scholarly activity are limited to training programs and lack an important element in overcoming barriers-their priority to physicians. This study seeks to address these gaps by identifying prioritized research training needs of military family medicine physicians at all levels of training and practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An institutional review board (IRB)-approved, cross-sectional, online survey was conducted from January 22, 2019, to February 7, 2020, using a modified version of the Hennessy-Hicks Training Needs Analysis Questionnaire. Respondents ranked their perceived level of skill and need for training for 20 literature-based elements of research success. They also self-identified research experience, level of training, and service membership. One-way analysis of variance to 95% CI was used to compare differences in self-reported research experience, number of peer-reviewed publications, number of external grants, and number of IRB protocols among services (Army, Navy, and Air Force), primary roles (resident, faculty, clinician, and leadership), and gender. Chi-squared tests were used to compare proportional differences, also to 95% CI. RESULTS: Of 124 respondents, most were members of the Air Force (46%), Navy (24%), or Army (13%), serving in clinician (40%) or faculty (32%) roles. Most respondents (67%) reported three or fewer publications and had never been a primary investigator or co-investigator on an external grant. Of the 34 respondents who identified as a faculty at some point in their career, 26 (77%) reported two or more peer-reviewed publications, and 20 (59%) had fewer than six publications. The faculty had significantly more research experience and peer-reviewed publications than residents, clinicians, or leaders (3.92 vs 2.19, 2.24, and 3.40, respectively, P < .001, η2 = 0.22; 5.11 vs 1.13, 2.12, and 4.33, respectively, P < .001, η2 = 0.25). Gender differences in priority ranking were found, but each gender identified the same top three training needs. Among the top 10 training needs for scholarly activity for military family medicine physicians, 7 may be addressed with specific training modules: (1) obtaining funding/grants for research, (2) accessing research resources (e.g., research administrators and other staff, information, equipment, money, and time), (3) establishing a relationship with research mentors, (4) undertaking health promotion studies, (5) designing a research study, (6) writing reports of your research studies, and (7) using technical equipment, including computer software, to find and organize published research or prepare manuscripts. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of military family medicine physicians' prioritized research training needs enables a focused approach to support an essential component of military medical readiness: primary care scholarship. Addressing these needs may begin with raising awareness of military primary care research network resources. Furthermore, a coordinated effort to develop specific training modules to address needs and ongoing research to identify, target training by audience need, and prioritize needs as they change over time are indicated to ensure that military family medicine physicians maintain and develop a flourishing culture of scholarly engagement.
Asunto(s)
Médicos Generales , Personal Militar , Humanos , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/educación , Estudios Transversales , Evaluación de NecesidadesRESUMEN
Scalp avulsion is a rare trauma in the developed world but is a common injury in countries with poorly established infrastructure and safety regulations. This case reports the long-term sequelae of this injury, observed while conducting a humanitarian mission, and discusses immediate actions for management in an acute setting. We aim to increase awareness about this injury, its risk factors, and treatment options to better prepare clinicians in the developed world to provide care for this condition in the austere environment, which may include not only chronic pain, functional, and aesthetic concerns, but also a psychological impact that persists years after the initial injury.
Asunto(s)
Amputación Traumática , Cuero Cabelludo , Humanos , Cuero Cabelludo/lesiones , Cuero Cabelludo/patología , Cicatriz/complicaciones , Factores de Riesgo , Amputación Traumática/complicaciones , Alopecia/complicaciones , Alopecia/patologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The optimal length of Family Medicine Residency is unknown. As part of the American Board of Family Medicine 4-year Length of Training (LoT) pilot project, Naval Hospital Jacksonville (NHJ) maintained a dual-track 3- and 4-year Family Medicine Residency, graduating seven 4-year residents over consecutive 4 years of the LoT program. One measure of success regarding the impact of 4-year residents on program outcomes is scholarly output during residency. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cumulative scholarly activity points are tracked for all NHJ residents. Cumulative scholarly activity points, points per year per, and raw percentile USMLE/COMLEX scores from academic years 2016-17 to 2019-20 were compared between PGY3 and PGY4 graduates using one-way ANOVA to 95% confidence with post hoc Tukey honestly significant difference pairwise comparison to evaluate pairwise significance between groups where multi-group differences were found. RESULTS: During the 2016-17 through 2019-20 academic years, NHJ had 28 residents complete 3 years of training without interruption (3 Years), 11 residents complete 3 years of training interrupted by general medical officer tours (Resiterns), and 7 residents complete 4 years of training without interruption (4 Years). There were no significant differences in average raw USMLE and COMLEX scores between 3 Year (71%), Resitern (68%), and 4 Year (76%) residents (P = .335). 4-Year residents had significantly more cumulative scholarly points (103) than 3-Year residents (32.6, P < .001) and Resiterns (18.7, P < .001) and also had more cumulative scholarly points per year of residency (27.8) than 3-Year residents (9.8, P < .001) and Resiterns (7.0, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: An observed benefit of a 4-year Family Medicine Residency was a marked increase in scholarly output at this program.
Asunto(s)
Internado y Residencia , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/educación , Proyectos Piloto , Educación de Postgrado en Medicina , CurriculumRESUMEN
While the cause of altered mentation in the elderly may be multifactorial, infectious etiologies may be missed. This case report aims to detail an account of a patient with dementia, found to have Lyme meningitis in the setting of a normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH). The patient smelled of urine and presented with ambulatory dysfunction, fitting the "wet, wacky, and wobbly" triad of NPH while also having subjective chills and leukocytosis. Non-contrast brain CT scan showed dilated ventricles. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) studies suggested aseptic meningitis. Serum studies using a modified two-tiered algorithm confirmed the diagnosis of Lyme disease. Treatment of the underlying condition with a prolonged course of doxycycline improved symptoms and clinical course. Review of the literature on the association between Lyme meningitis and NPH reveals that few cases of Lyme-related NPH have been reported worldwide and further research into the pathophysiology, diagnostic approach, treatment modalities, and management of NPH secondary to Lyme meningitis may be warranted.
Asunto(s)
Demencia , Hidrocéfalo Normotenso , Enfermedad de Lyme , Meningitis , Humanos , Anciano , Hidrocéfalo Normotenso/diagnóstico , Hidrocéfalo Normotenso/diagnóstico por imagen , Encéfalo , Enfermedad de Lyme/complicaciones , Enfermedad de Lyme/diagnóstico , Meningitis/complicaciones , Meningitis/diagnóstico , Demencia/complicaciones , Demencia/diagnósticoRESUMEN
Novel, public behaviors, such as masking, should be susceptible to normative influence. This paper advances the theory of normative social behavior by considering a new set of moderators of normative influence - superdiffuser traits - and by clarifying the antecedents and consequences of exposure to collective norms. We use data from a two-wave survey of a cohort living in one U.S. county during the pandemic (N = 913) to assess normative effects on masking. We also used a bipartite network (based on people shopping for food in the same stores) to examine exposure to collective norms. The results show different superdiffuser traits have distinct effects on the relationship between perceived injunctive norms and masking intentions. Exposure to collective norms influences masking, but this influence depends on how people interact with their social environments. Network analysis shows that behavioral homophily is a significant predictor of selective exposure to collective norms earlier (but not later) in the pandemic. Implications for understanding normative influence in a context where opinion leadership matters are discussed.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Medicolegal dilemmas faced by Sports Medicine providers differ from those of other primary care physicians in type and frequency. Exotic, high-profile challenges are widely covered in the literature and offer guidance on how to navigate challenging situations. However, there is a gap in the literature on how to approach more mundane, but nevertheless common, medicolegal dilemmas. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to provide Sports Medicine providers simple tools for determining whether a course of action is legal or ethical and offer Sports Medicine educators a model for teaching these skills. METHODS: We searched U.S. federal and state law using the LexisNexis® database for laws regulating Sports Medicine practice, and PubMed for articles related to physician approaches to Sports Medicine legal and ethical challenges. Searches started with the term sports medicine, and included winnowing terms of ethics, ethical practice, ethical guidelines, law, and legal guidelines. We used current ethical practice guidelines followed by the American Medical Association and described in detail by Beauchamp and Childress. RESULTS: We offer a framework for how to approach legal challenges in Sports Medicine and apply it to four common scenarios that Sports Medicine physicians often face. We further suggest that the profession formally address this literature gap with a standardized curriculum in Sports Medicine law. CONCLUSION: A curriculum using this framework and clinical vignettes provides learners and practitioners with familiarity and confidence when legal and ethical challenges arise in Sports Medicine.